Language transfer

"Negative transfer" redirects here. For other uses, see Negative transfer (disambiguation).

Language transfer is the application of linguistic features from one language to another by a bilingual or multilingual speaker. Language transfer may occur across both languages in the acquisition of a simultaneous bilingual, from a mature speaker's first language (L1) to a second language (L2) they are acquiring, or from an L2 back to the L1.^[1] Language transfer (also known as L1 interference, linguistic interference, and crosslinguistic influence) is most commonly discussed in the context of English language learning and teaching, but it can occur in any situation when someone does not have a native-level command of a language, as when translating into a second language. Language transfer is also a common topic in bilingual child language acquisition as it occurs frequently in bilingual children especially when one language is dominant.^[2]

Types of language transfer

 

Blackboard in Harvard classroom shows students' efforts at placing the ü and acute accent diacritics used in Spanish orthography.

When the relevant unit or structure of both languages is the same, linguistic interference can result in correct language production called positive transfer: here, the "correct" meaning is in line with most native speakers' notions of acceptability.^[3] An example is the use of cognates. However, language interference is most often discussed as a source of errors known as negative transfer, which can occur when speakers and writers transfer items and structures that are not the same in both languages.

Negative transfer

Within the theory of contrastive analysis, the systematic study of a pair of languages with a view to identifying their structural differences and similarities, the greater the differences between the two languages, the more negative transfer can be expected.^[4] For example, in English, a preposition is used before a day of the week: "I'm going to the beach on Friday." In Spanish, instead of a preposition the definite article is used: "Voy a la playa el viernes." Novice Spanish students who are native English-speakers may produce a transfer error and use a preposition when it is not necessary because of their reliance on English. According to Whitley, it is natural for students to make such errors based on how the English words are used.^[5] Another typical example of negative transfer concerns German students trying to learn English, despite being part of the same Germanic language family. Since the German noun "Information" can also be used in the plural – "Informationen" – German students will almost invariably use "informations" in English, too, which would break the rules of uncountable nouns.^[6] From a more general standpoint, Brown mentions "all new learning involves transfer based on previous learning".^[7] That could also explain why initial learning of L1 will impact L2 acquisition.

Positive transfer

The results of positive transfer go largely unnoticed and so are less often discussed. Nonetheless, such results can have an observable effect. Generally speaking, the more similar the two languages are and the more the learner is aware of the relation between them, the more positive transfer will occur. For example, an Anglophone learner of German may correctly guess an item of German vocabulary from its English counterpart, but word order, phonetics, connotations, collocation, and other language features are more likely to differ. That is why such an approach has the disadvantage of making the learner more subject to the influence of "false friends", words that seem similar between languages but differ significantly in meaning. This influence is especially common among learners who misjudge the relation between languages or mainly rely on visual learning.^[8]

In addition to positive transfer potentially resulting in correct language production and negative transfer resulting in errors, there is some evidence that any transfer from the first language can result in a kind of technical, or analytical, advantage over native (monolingual) speakers of a language. For example, L2 speakers of English whose first language is Korean have been found to be more accurate with perception of unreleased stops in English than native English speakers who are functionally monolingual because of the different status of unreleased stops in Korean from English.^[9] That "native-language transfer benefit" appears to depend on an alignment of properties in the first and the second languages that favors the linguistic biases of the first language, rather than simply the perceived similarities between two languages.

Conscious and unconscious transfer

Language transfer may be conscious or unconscious. Consciously, learners or unskilled translators may sometimes guess when producing speech or text in a second language because they have not learned or have forgotten its proper usage. Unconsciously, they may not realize that the structures and internal rules of the languages in question are different. Such users could also be aware of both the structures and internal rules, yet be insufficiently skilled to put them into practice, and consequently often fall back on their first language. The unconscious aspect to language transfer can be demonstrated in the case of the so-called "transfer-to-nowhere" principle put forward by Eric Kellerman, which addressed language based on its conceptual organization instead of its syntactic features. Here, language determines how the speaker conceptualizes experience, with the principle describing the process as an unconscious assumption that is subject to between-language variation.^[10] Kellerman explained that it is difficult for learners to acquire the construal patterns of a new language because "learners may not look for the perspectives peculiar to the [target/L2] language; instead they may seek the linguistic tools which will permit them to maintain their L1 perspective."^[11]

The conscious transfer of language, on the other hand, can be illustrated in the principle developed by Roger Andersen called "transfer-to-somewhere," which holds that "a language structure will be susceptible to transfer only if it is compatible with natural acquisitional principles or is perceived to have similar counterpart (a somewhere to transfer to) in the recipient language."^[12] This is interpreted as a heuristic designed to make sense of the target language input by assuming a form of awareness on the part of the learner to map L1 onto the L2.^[13] An analogy that can describe the differences between the Kellerman's and Anderson's principles is that the former is concerned with the conceptualization that fuels the drive towards discovering the means of linguistic expression whereas Andersen's focused on the acquisition of those means.^[13]

Acceleration and deceleration

The theories of acceleration and deceleration are bilingual child language acquisition theories based on the known norms of monolingual acquisition. These theories come from comparisons of bilingual children's acquisition to that of their monolingual peers of similar backgrounds.

Acceleration is a process similar to that of bootstrapping, where a child acquiring language uses knowledge and skills from one language to aid in, and speed up their acquisition of the other language.^[14]

Deceleration is a process in which a child experiences negative effects (more mistakes and slower language learning) on their language acquisition due to interference from their other language.

Literacy development

Language transfer is often referred to as cross-language transfer, the ability to use skills acquired in one language and to use those skills to facilitate learning of a new language.^[15] Cross-language transfer has been researched and analyzed by many scholars over the years, but the focus on cross-language transfer in literacy research expanded in the 1990s.^[16] It is a topic that has been gaining lots of interest from scholars due to the increasing amount of bilingual and multilingual people, especially students, around the world. In the USA alone, English Language Learners (ELL) account for over 10% of the students enrolled in public schools.^[17]

The Linguistic Interdependence Hypothesis claims that language transfer can occur from L1 (First language) to L2 (Second language), but there first must be a level of proficiency in L1 literacy skills for the skills to transfer over into L2.^[18] In other words, there must be some prior knowledge of literacy skills in L1 to assist with acquiring literacy skills in  L2. The acquisition of L2 literacy skills can be facilitated and gained with greater ease by having more time, access, and experience  with L1 literary skills.^[19] Over time, through formal exposure and practice with literacy skills, L2 learners have been able to catch up with their monolingual peers.^[20] However, literacy skills acquired in L2 can also be used to assist with literacy skills in L1 because cross-language transfer is bidirectional.^[21]

Most studies have indicated that literacy cross-language transfer can occur regardless of the L1 and the L2 languages, but Chung et al. (2012^[22]) state that cross-language transfer is less likely to occur when the languages do not share similar orthography systems. For example, using literacy skills acquired in English may be accessed and used with more ease in Spanish because English and Spanish follow similar orthography (they use letters). Whereas, using literacy skills acquired in English to facilitate ease of learning Korean would be more difficult because those languages do not follow a similar orthography system (English uses letters, and Korean uses symbols).

Cross-language transfer can also occur with deaf bilinguals who use sign language and read written words.^[23] People may think that both American Sign Language (ASL) and English are the same language, but they are not. According to the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communications Disorders  “ASL is a language completely separate and distinct from English. It contains all the fundamental features of language, with its own rules for pronunciation, word formation, and word order".^[24] Because sign languages are considered to be their own language, most deaf people are considered to be bilingual because they speak in one language (sign language) and read in other (English, Spanish, Arabic, etc.). It should also be noted that not all sign languages are the same. The sign languages are American Sign Language (ASL), Mexican Sign Language (LSM), British Sign Language (BSL), Spanish Sign Language (LSE), and many more.  

In comprehension

Transfer can also occur in polyglot individuals when comprehending verbal utterances or written language. For instance, German and English both have relative clauses with a noun-noun-verb (=NNV) order but which are interpreted differently in both languages:

German example: Das Mädchen, das die Frau küsst, ist blond

If translated word for word with word order maintained, this German relative clause is equivalent to

English example: The girl that (or whom) the woman is kissing is blonde.

The German and the English examples differ in that in German the subject role can be taken by das Mädchen (the girl) or die Frau (the woman) while in the English example only the second noun phrase (the woman) can be the subject. In short, because German singular feminine and neuter articles exhibit the same inflected form for the accusative as for the nominative case, the German example is syntactically ambiguous in that either the girl or the woman may be doing the kissing. In the English example, both word-order rules and the test of substituting a relative pronoun with different nominative and accusative case markings (e.g., whom/who*) reveal that only the woman can be doing the kissing.

The ambiguity of the German NNV relative clause structure becomes obvious in cases where the assignment of subject and object role is disambiguated. This can be because of case marking if one of the nouns is grammatically male as in Der Mann, den die Frau küsst... (The man that the woman is kissing...) vs. Der Mann, der die Frau küsst (The man that is kissing the woman...) because in German the male definite article marks the accusative case. The syntactic ambiguity of the German example also becomes obvious in the case of semantic disambiguation. For instance in Das Eis, das die Frau isst... (The ice cream that the woman is eating...) and Die Frau, die das Eis isst... (The woman that is eating the ice cream...) only die Frau (the woman) is a plausible subject.

Because in English relative clauses with a noun-noun-verb structure (as in the example above) the first noun can only be the object, native speakers of English who speak German as a second language are likelier to interpret ambiguous German NNV relative clauses as object relative clauses (= object-subject-verb order) than German native speakers who prefer an interpretation in which the first noun phrase is the subject (subject-object-verb order).^[25] This is because they have transferred their parsing preference from their first language English to their second language German.

Broader effects

With sustained or intense contact between native and non-native speakers, the results of language transfer in the non-native speakers can extend to and affect the speech production of the native-speaking community. For example, in North America, speakers of English whose first language is Spanish or French may have a certain influence on native English speakers' use of language when the native speakers are in the minority. Locations where this phenomenon occurs frequently include Québec, Canada, and predominantly Spanish-speaking regions in the US. For details on the latter, see the map of the Hispanophone world and the list of U.S. communities with Hispanic majority populations. The process of translation can also lead to the so-called hybrid text, which is the mixing of language either at the level of linguistic codes or at the level of cultural or historical references.^[26]

See also

• Calque
• Code-switching
• Contrastive rhetoric
• Interlanguage
• Language contact
• Language learning misconceptions
• Loanword
• Macaronic language
• Mixed language
• Multi-competence
• Native-language identification
• Phono-semantic matching
• Second language acquisition
• Sprachbund
• Translation

Notes

1. Jarvis, Scott, 1966- (2008). Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. Pavlenko, Aneta, 1963-. New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-203-93592-7. OCLC 220962778.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
2. Paradis, Johanne; Genesee, Fred (1996). "SYNTACTIC ACQUISITION IN BILINGUAL CHILDREN: Autonomous or Interdependent?". Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 18 (1): 1–25. doi:10.1017/S0272263100014662. ISSN 0272-2631. JSTOR 44487857. S2CID 143994688.
3. Shatz, Itamar (2017). Native Language Influence During Second Language Acquisition: A Large-Scale Learner Corpus Analysis (PDF). Proceedings of the Pacific Second Language Research Forum (PacSLRF 2016). Hiroshima, Japan: Japan Second Language Association. pp. 175–180. Retrieved 10 September 2017.
4. Lennon, P. (2008). Contrastive analysis, error analysis, interlanguage. In S. Gramley & V. Gramley (Eds.), Bielefeld Introduction to Applied Linguistics (pp. 51-60). Bielefeld, Germany: Aisthesis.
5. Whitley, M. Stanley (2002). Spanish-English Contrasts: A Course in Spanish Linguistics. Georgetown University Press. p. 358. ISBN 978-0-87840-381-3. Retrieved 12 May 2013.
6. Wahlbrinck, Bernd (2017) (2017). German-English Language Interference: 56 Innovative Photocopiable Worksheets for Teachers & ESL Students. ISBN 978-3-00-057535-8.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
7. Bransford , J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. (Expanded ed., PDF). Washington D.C.: National Academy Press, ISBN 0309070368.
8. Solé Alonso, Gemma; Pladevall Ballester, Elisabet (2017). False friends in advanced learners of English. The effect of task type and mode. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
9. Chang & Mishler 2012
10. Littlemore, Jeannette (2009). Applying Cognitive Linguistics to Second Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 37. ISBN 9781349304936.
11. Robinson, Peter; Ellis, Nick (2008). Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. New York: Routledge. pp. 284. ISBN 9780805853513.
12. Paulasto, Heli; Riionheimo, Helka; Meriläinen, Lea; Kok, Maria (2014). Language Contacts at the Crossroads of Disciplines. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. p. 142. ISBN 9781443866248.
13. Han, Zhaohong (2004). Fossilization in Adult Second Language Acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. pp. 71. ISBN 978-1853596872.
14. Fabiano-Smith Leah; Goldstein Brian A. (1 February 2010). "Phonological Acquisition in Bilingual Spanish–English Speaking Children". Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 53 (1): 160–178. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2009/07-0064). PMID 20150407.
15. Yang, Man; Cooc, North; Sheng, Li (2 October 2017). "An investigation of cross-linguistic transfer between Chinese and English: a meta-analysis". Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education. 2 (1): 15. doi:10.1186/s40862-017-0036-9. ISSN 2363-5169. S2CID 44047677.
16. Chung, Sheila Cira; Chen, Xi; Geva, Esther (1 May 2019). "Deconstructing and reconstructing cross-language transfer in bilingual reading development: An interactive framework". Journal of Neurolinguistics. Cross-linguistic perspectives on second language reading. 50: 149–161. doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2018.01.003. ISSN 0911-6044. S2CID 53199706.
17. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition (August 2022). "English Learners: Demographic Trends" (PDF). National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition. Retrieved 11 October 2022.
18. Feinauer, Erika; Hall-Kenyon, Kendra M.; Davison, Kimberlee C. (1 September 2013). "Cross-Language Transfer of Early Literacy Skills: An Examination of Young Learners in a Two-Way Bilingual Immersion Elementary School". Reading Psychology. 34 (5): 436–460. doi:10.1080/02702711.2012.658142. ISSN 0270-2711. S2CID 144416837.
19. Abbasian, Reza; Hadian, Bahram; Vaez-Dalili, Mehdi (1 December 2020). "Exploring the interplay between Iranian EFL learners' first language (L1) literacy resources and their performance on L2 receptive skills". Current Psychology. 39 (6): 1900–1909. doi:10.1007/s12144-018-0059-5. ISSN 1936-4733. S2CID 149920398.
20. Babayigit, Selma (2014). "The role of oral language skills in reading and listening comprehension of text: a comparison of monolingual (L1) and bilingual (L2) speakers of English language" (PDF). Journal of Research in Reading. 37 (S1): S22–S47. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2012.01538.x.
21. Kim, Young-Suk Grace; Piper, Benjamin (2019). Cross-Language Transfer of Reading Skills: An Empirical Investigation of Bidirectionality and the Influence of Instructional Environments. Vol. 32.
22. Chuang, Hui-Kai; Joshi, R.Malatesha; Dixon, L. Quentin (March 2012). "Cross-Language Transfer of Reading Ability: Evidence From Taiwanese Ninth-Grade Adolescents". Journal of Literacy Research. 44 (1): 97–119. doi:10.1177/1086296X11431157. S2CID 144558088.
23. Wang, Yuanbo; Du, Menglin; Yu, Keke; Shen, Guangyin; Deng, Ting; Wang, Ruiming (1 September 2022). "Bi-directional cross-language activation in Chinese Sign Language (CSL)-Chinese bimodal bilinguals". Acta Psychologica. 229: 103693. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103693. ISSN 0001-6918. PMID 35933798. S2CID 251358752.
24. "American Sign Language". NIDCD. Retrieved 14 October 2022.
25. Nitschke, Kidd & Serratrice 2010.
26. Gambier, Yves; van Doorslaer, Luc (2011). Handbook of Translation Studies, Volume 2. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company. p. 49. ISBN 9789027203328.

References

• Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, and Experience & School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
• Chang, C. B.; Mishler, A. (2012). "Evidence for language transfer leading to a perceptual advantage for non-native listeners" (PDF). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 132 (4): 2700–2710. Bibcode:2012ASAJ..132.2700C. doi:10.1121/1.4747615. PMID 23039462.
• Nitschke, S.; Kidd, E.; Serratrice, L. (2010). "First language transfer and long-term structural priming in comprehension". Language and Cognitive Processes. 25 (1): 94–114. doi:10.1080/01690960902872793. hdl:11858/00-001M-0000-002E-2DFF-1. S2CID 145749085.
• Porter, L. W.; Duncan, C. P. (1953). "Negative Transfer in Verbal Learning". Journal of Experimental Psychology. 46 (1): 61–64. doi:10.1037/h0058595. PMID 13069669.
• Postman, L (1962). "Transfer of training as a function of experimental paradigm and degree of first list learning". Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 1 (2): 109–118. doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(62)80007-3.
• Postman, L.; Stark, K. (1969). "Role of response availability in transfer and interference". Journal of Experimental Psychology. 79 (1): 168–177. doi:10.1037/h0026932.
• Underwood, B. J. (1949). "Proactive inhibition as a function of time and degree of prior learning". Journal of Experimental Psychology. 39 (1): 24–34. doi:10.1037/h0059550. PMID 18111558.
• Wahlbrinck, Bernd. German-English Language Interference, Tumbleweed 2017.
• Whitley, M. Stanley (2002), Spanish/English Contrasts: A Course in Spanish Linguistics (2nd ed.), Georgetown University Press, ISBN 978-0-87840-381-3